There have been a lot of reports recently that the Lions don't know who they will take at #2. I figured that it was a smokescreen, but then I read this:

Detroit News wrote:

John Niyo: LionsLions GM, coach striving for consensus on who they should take at No. 2

Allen Park -- They made it look easy last year.

But now comes the hard part, perhaps, for Lions general manager Martin Mayhew, head coach Jim Schwartz and his staff.

A year ago, they had little trouble agreeing on Matthew Stafford as the No. 1 overall pick after months of scouting work and interviews and debate.

There wasn't much, if any, dissent with their next two picks, either, as tight end Brandon Pettigrew fell to them at No. 20 and safety Louis Delmas was available at the top of the second round. (In fact, Schwartz said the only other time in 17 years in the NFL he'd seen such unanimity with a draft pick was in Tennessee when the Titans selected running back Chris Johnson in 2008.)

All of which brings us to this year's draft.

Are they lacking consensus?Mayhew said Thursday the Lions haven't decided who they'll select at No. 2 overall. And when asked about trying to reach the same consensus with this franchise-altering pick as the Lions did with Stafford, the GM said, "In this situation here, I think we still have time to get to that point. We're not at that point right now."

It's hardly a surprise to hear Mayhew say that publicly -- "I like to keep my options open," he explained -- and to be fair, he said the same thing a year ago when Stafford was the pick. So maybe it's all a smokescreeen to try to generate a legitimate trade offer at No. 2.

But here's the greater concern for the Lions: What if he's telling the truth? What if they haven't reached a consensus yet?

Or more to the point, what if the second-year GM and head coach aren't in complete agreement? What if Mayhew's preference is to invest in one of the offensive tackles -- Russell Okung or Trent Williams -- and Schwartz, like most of the rest of us, wants the team to draft defensive tackle Ndamukong Suh, or possibly Gerald McCoy?

I don't know that to be the case. But I wouldn't be shocked if it was, nor would it be all that unusual in the NFL. (It's why established head coaches like Bill Belichick and Mike Shanahan and Andy Reid insist on final say over personnel matters.)

'We'll be on same page'A year ago, Mayhew vowed, "Whoever we pick, it'll be a player that Jim and I both like. We'll be on the same page." That's as true now as it was then, everyone says. They're determined not to repeat the mistakes of the past in Allen Park.

"We felt very strongly about Matt last year, and we'll feel very strongly about anybody that we pick at No. 2," Schwartz told WBBL radio in Grand Rapids on Thursday.

Mayhew was quick to point out Thursday that it's "very tight" at the top of the team's draft board. (Schwartz also raved about the depth of defensive line talent in this year's class, for what it's worth.) Presumably, that means they all like all those players, as they should.

Agreeing on which one they like best at No. 2 may not be as simple a task this time around, though.

Mayhew said he and Schwartz would spend more time watching film and breaking ties among clusters of players throughout their draft board, just like they did -- rather successfully -- a year ago. Schwartz said Friday the draft board is 90 percent.

But soon enough, it'll be time for Mayhew to make the final call -- "We don't have any choice but to be decided by Thursday night," he said -- and we may find out just what kind of consensus-builder he really is.

I don't know about anybody else, but this scares me. It sounds like maybe Schwartz wants the BPA in Suh, while Mayhew prefers the positional value of Okung or something like that. They really promoted the idea that they had a consensus last year, but that doesn't appear to be the case now.

There have been a lot of reports recently that the Lions don't know who they will take at #2. I figured that it was a smokescreen, but then I read this:

Detroit News wrote:

John Niyo: LionsLions GM, coach striving for consensus on who they should take at No. 2

Allen Park -- They made it look easy last year.

But now comes the hard part, perhaps, for Lions general manager Martin Mayhew, head coach Jim Schwartz and his staff.

A year ago, they had little trouble agreeing on Matthew Stafford as the No. 1 overall pick after months of scouting work and interviews and debate.

There wasn't much, if any, dissent with their next two picks, either, as tight end Brandon Pettigrew fell to them at No. 20 and safety Louis Delmas was available at the top of the second round. (In fact, Schwartz said the only other time in 17 years in the NFL he'd seen such unanimity with a draft pick was in Tennessee when the Titans selected running back Chris Johnson in 2008.)

All of which brings us to this year's draft.

Are they lacking consensus?Mayhew said Thursday the Lions haven't decided who they'll select at No. 2 overall. And when asked about trying to reach the same consensus with this franchise-altering pick as the Lions did with Stafford, the GM said, "In this situation here, I think we still have time to get to that point. We're not at that point right now."

It's hardly a surprise to hear Mayhew say that publicly -- "I like to keep my options open," he explained -- and to be fair, he said the same thing a year ago when Stafford was the pick. So maybe it's all a smokescreeen to try to generate a legitimate trade offer at No. 2.

But here's the greater concern for the Lions: What if he's telling the truth? What if they haven't reached a consensus yet?

Or more to the point, what if the second-year GM and head coach aren't in complete agreement? What if Mayhew's preference is to invest in one of the offensive tackles -- Russell Okung or Trent Williams -- and Schwartz, like most of the rest of us, wants the team to draft defensive tackle Ndamukong Suh, or possibly Gerald McCoy?

I don't know that to be the case. But I wouldn't be shocked if it was, nor would it be all that unusual in the NFL. (It's why established head coaches like Bill Belichick and Mike Shanahan and Andy Reid insist on final say over personnel matters.)

'We'll be on same page'A year ago, Mayhew vowed, "Whoever we pick, it'll be a player that Jim and I both like. We'll be on the same page." That's as true now as it was then, everyone says. They're determined not to repeat the mistakes of the past in Allen Park.

"We felt very strongly about Matt last year, and we'll feel very strongly about anybody that we pick at No. 2," Schwartz told WBBL radio in Grand Rapids on Thursday.

Mayhew was quick to point out Thursday that it's "very tight" at the top of the team's draft board. (Schwartz also raved about the depth of defensive line talent in this year's class, for what it's worth.) Presumably, that means they all like all those players, as they should.

Agreeing on which one they like best at No. 2 may not be as simple a task this time around, though.

Mayhew said he and Schwartz would spend more time watching film and breaking ties among clusters of players throughout their draft board, just like they did -- rather successfully -- a year ago. Schwartz said Friday the draft board is 90 percent.

But soon enough, it'll be time for Mayhew to make the final call -- "We don't have any choice but to be decided by Thursday night," he said -- and we may find out just what kind of consensus-builder he really is.

I don't know about anybody else, but this scares me. It sounds like maybe Schwartz wants the BPA in Suh, while Mayhew prefers the positional value of Okung or something like that. They really promoted the idea that they had a consensus last year, but that doesn't appear to be the case now.

Actually, I disagree and I think history proves me right. Look at the bolded part of the article. They said the same kind of things last year as well. It's just a smokescreen. And even if they have 100% reached a consensus at this point, I have not doubts they will be on the same page come draft day. I'm not worried at all.

_________________"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." - John Adams

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” - Neil deGrasse Tyson

April 18th, 2010, 10:35 am

inheritedlionsfan

League MVP

Joined: January 13th, 2006, 4:18 amPosts: 3666Location: Maryland

I really hope it's just a smokescreen to get someone thinking "ok they may take my guy I'd better move up" so that they get a decent trade offer.

April 18th, 2010, 10:36 am

buell17

Afghan Allstar

Joined: January 9th, 2006, 1:16 pmPosts: 564Location: San Diego, CA

Re: Are the Lions having difficulty reaching a consensus at

Detroit News wrote:

I don't know that to be the case.

That line right there says it all. This sounds like someone who doesn't have a story and is trying to make one.

_________________So many nights I just dream of the ocean, God I wish I was sailing again.

April 18th, 2010, 11:16 am

reinolds3

Bubbles the Lion

Joined: January 11th, 2009, 5:40 pmPosts: 50

It is just the usual crap around this time of the year.
I think it is smoke screens because they have nothing to gain by saying they have selected a player. If they say they are undecided other teams who might have fallen head over heals for Suh, Okung or any other players and are close to our standing, say 3 to 7, might offer something like a third or 4th and still jump up.
I would be happy with Washingtons pick and their 4th.

I think it literally comes down to Suh or Okung? For a while now, I also wondered if they might be thinking of taking Spiller at #2? I hope not, but... who knows? It's nerve racking and exciting at the same time!

_________________Lions Fan since King Kong was a Spider Monkey!

April 18th, 2010, 11:51 am

jomo269

NFL Team Captain

Joined: January 27th, 2005, 9:12 pmPosts: 1610Location: Midland, MI

If we are to trade this pick it will take a hellava lot more than their pick (whatever it may be) and a 4th.

If we were to trade with Washington they would have to include Haynesworth. They want a DT, then if we give them the pick to get one Then we want a quality one in return.

Haynesworth is a player that they want off their team, thus we would be doing them a solid, so basically the reparation for the trade should start after the inclusion of their problem child. That was the appitizer, now for the entree.

Now bare with me for a bit.

Toss in another player that they want to rid themselves of, namely Cinton Portis.......I believe that Portis could be part of a RBBC until Smith comes back or a rookie we draft is ready to carry the load. It's an uncapped year so we eat the salary and hope we can get "some" use out of him. Hence another solid for the Skins.

Now it's time for the Skins to pay up.

Do we want them to throw in LaRon Landry? Maybe?

Now for the picks they will need to give. We actually owe them a bit for Albert and LaRon so we won't be able to rape them like we did Dallas.
I don't know how the Skins stand with picks this year or next so all the rest of this is just conjecture.

What is it worth to move from 4 to 2 to get the player you covet? After you consider everything that has gone on before discussing picks, what will we require?

We have a quality starting DT, a safety that may flurish next to Delmas and a RB that can hopefully be serviceable as a part of RBBC until we fill that position at will and not as an act of desperation.

So what do we do, what do we want? I'll take a 2 and a 3, be it this year or next. Plus of coarse their 1.

This trade will go down in history with the infamous Mike Ditka selling the farm move although not the same type of deal.

Feel free to tear me to shreads, please address all insults to Sly, cause he is a good guy that needs alittle spice in his life.(j/k Sly)

Be it a dream or a GM's fantasy, you guys take it and tweak it to make it realistic. I'd really enjoy seeing what you do with it.

Just like that long haired dude did with Eve and that apple tree

April 18th, 2010, 3:28 pm

steensn

RIP Killer

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pmPosts: 13429

The pick is Okung without a trade down is my call... I do hope that I am wrong and we get one of the two DTs.

Jomo, as I said in another thread, the Rams passing on Bradford is the only possible scenario where I can see Washington moving up from #4 to #2. It just isn't going to happen IMO because it makes no sense for them to do so. But I guess we'll see on Thursday.

As for the Lions lacking a consensus, I can only hope that it's a smokescreen, but I just don't know.

_________________

April 19th, 2010, 9:42 am

m2karateman

RIP Killer

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pmPosts: 10408Location: Where ever I'm at now

I have a feeling Mayhew wants Okung, but Schwartz wants Suh. Mayhew should be the one to allow the coach to get the player he wants.

If Mayhew pushes the issue and takes Okung, he will be the target of hate e-mails in a big way. He will be the one responsible for going over the head of the coach, just like his predecessor did.

He better f-ing take Suh, or trade down. Any other move will be harshly criticized for many years.

April 19th, 2010, 9:50 am

Topweasel

Walk On

Joined: May 20th, 2009, 5:40 pmPosts: 444

m2karateman wrote:

I have a feeling Mayhew wants Okung, but Schwartz wants Suh. Mayhew should be the one to allow the coach to get the player he wants.

If Mayhew pushes the issue and takes Okung, he will be the target of hate e-mails in a big way. He will be the one responsible for going over the head of the coach, just like his predecessor did.

He better f-ing take Suh, or trade down. Any other move will be harshly criticized for many years.

Could be the other way around. I think Stafford's best friend on the team isn't Mayhew but Schwartz. Not saying it is the case, just that they may have been targeting Williams, Hargrove, and KVB, in attempt to make Suh not at a position of need so that they could go with Okung for Schwartz to protect his QB.

But my guess is both of them are smart enough to see that Suh is the person to pick. Either way they don't pick anyone else unless something else happens. One of the two probably wants a trade thats agreeable to both of them to move back and select Okung whom both probably don't have an issue with.

April 19th, 2010, 10:24 am

m2karateman

RIP Killer

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pmPosts: 10408Location: Where ever I'm at now

Topweasel wrote:

Could be the other way around. I think Stafford's best friend on the team isn't Mayhew but Schwartz. Not saying it is the case, just that they may have been targeting Williams, Hargrove, and KVB, in attempt to make Suh not at a position of need so that they could go with Okung for Schwartz to protect his QB.

But my guess is both of them are smart enough to see that Suh is the person to pick. Either way they don't pick anyone else unless something else happens. One of the two probably wants a trade thats agreeable to both of them to move back and select Okung whom both probably don't have an issue with.

Possible. But here's my take on it.

Schwartz - came out in early February and spoke very highly of Backus. I don't think he was posturing on this. I believe he was trying to get fans to stop criticizing Backus for being the source of the teams o-line troubles. He had no reason at that time to talk up Backus for anything other than that reason. It was too far away from the draft for talk of that nature to have an impact. Also, Schwartz is a defense guy. He is a numbers guy. The numbers tell him he needs to address this side of the ball. His scheme tells him he wants a dominant DT as part of his overall attack.

Mayhew - as the GM he is a numbers guy as well, but not stats. He sees dollar signs in Matt Stafford and wants nothing more than to protect him. However, I think he sees this only in the short term. If he wants to protect this guy, let him hand off the ball more. That means a team that isn't constantly coming from behind because of a swiss cheese defense. Stafford doesn't get hit when he hands off the ball. He's bound to get hit, no matter WHO is at left tackle, when he is forced to throw the ball 40 times or more a game.

So, in my eyes the most logical decision split is that Schwartz wants a DT and Mayhew wants an OT.

I would agree that both are more than ready to trade down, and depending on where they would end up at would agree on an OT at that point. Jim Schwartz being the way he is, I'm sure he sees value in adding some picks in a very deep draft.